Doug,

It only mattered in the sense that Craig B. is a highly respected member of this community and something that portrays a "revisionist history" and a "politically correct" position might be construed a fact by many readers.

I'm not bothered by VFP being out-of-the-box. How it got there matters, if only for posterity. I would not appreciate that Fernando's History of FoxPro gem of a web site reflected in any way any hint that the community ASKED for it and MS obliged. That wasn't the case.

Jim


>Jim,
>
>>Doug,
>>
>>So you're saying that someone from the community asked MS to removed VFP from .NET, MS replied by asking opinions from the community, declared victory to the requestor, then did as was asked?
>
>Does it really matter how it happened? <g> I mean, it's out and that's that.
>
>I think Fernando has it right though. The discussion 'surfaced' and went from there.
>
>
>>
>>I watched the discussions too, and I don't remember it that way.
>>
>>
>>>Jim,
>>>
>>>Not the case. I watched those discussions take place.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>SNIP
>>>>>
>>>>>I think there is some confusion with the newsgroups that are referenced there. VFP was originally in VS .Net and available in Beta 1. It was pulled after that due to requests from the VFP Community.
>>>>
>>>>The part of the quote that I want to clarify is bolded (by me).
>>>>
>>>>It certainly NEVER came across to me as "requests from the VFP community" and to me this amounts to FUD!
>>>>
>>>>In fact, to this outsider it looked like the VFP Team had pretty well made up it's mind that VFP was NOT to be included with VS.NET and then they set out on a campaign, asking (the community) a loaded question for opinions, and then made the announcement.
>>>>
>>>>Calling it "requests from the VFP community" is such a stretch in my opinion that I had to comment.
>>>>
>>>>Jim
>>>>
>>>>SNIP